John Burnight, «Does Eliphaz Really Begin 'Gently'? An Intertextual Reading of Job 4,2-11», Vol. 95 (2014) 347-370
It is widely believed that the Joban poet presents Eliphaz as seeking to reassure Job in his first speech, and only later accuses him of wrongdoing. One prominent exegete, for example, remarks that Eliphaz 'begins considerately, and proceeds with notable gentleness and courtesy' (Terrien). In this paper I propose that Eliphaz’s opening words are neither gentle nor reassuring. Instead, they are a sharp intertextual response to Job’s complaints that he can find no 'rest' (3,26) and that what he 'feared has come upon him' (3,25). In essence, Eliphaz is implying that Job has brought his suffering on himself.
02_Burnight-co_347_370 28/10/14 10:35 Pagina 347
Does Eliphaz Really Begin “Gently”?
An Intertextual Reading of Job 4,2-11
I. The Problem: does Eliphaz initially praise or rebuke Job?
Many modern interpreters are of the opinion that Eliphaz affirms
Job’s righteousness in his first speech in Job 4–5, and only later ac-
cuses him of wrongdoing. Commentators cite his opening words
in 4,2-6, in particular, as evidence that Eliphaz is praising Job’s
good deeds in an effort to offer him support and reassurance in his
time of suffering. Terrien, for example, remarks that Eliphaz “be-
gins considerately, and proceeds with notable gentleness and cour-
tesy”, while Pope writes that he “appears to concede that Job’s piety
and conduct have been exemplary” 1.
It is difficult, however, to reconcile this positive reading with
some of the other verses in Eliphaz’s speech. His emphasis on the
fate of the wicked in 4,8-11, for example, would be peculiar if he
believed Job to be guiltless; in some of the older commentaries (e.g.,
those of Duhm, Peake, Strahan, Ball), in fact, this presumed shift in
tone has led scholars to go so far as to delete vv. 8-11 in whole or in
part and/or to propose that they are later interpolations 2. Among
more recent interpreters, Terrien, Driver-Gray, Clines, Newsom, and
many others have noted the inappropriateness or clumsiness of various
statements in 4,7-11 if Eliphaz’s aim is to comfort Job 3. That Eliphaz
1
S. TERRIEN, “The Book of Job: Introduction and Exegesis”, The Inter-
preter’s Bible 3 (1954) 877-1198, here 932; M. POPE, Job (Garden City, NY
3
1973) 36. For a very different assessment of Eliphaz’s intent, one that inter-
prets Eliphaz’s words here as an accusation rather than an attempt to comfort
Job, see M. BUTTENWIESER, The Book of Job (New York 1922) 161.
2
D.B. DUHM, Das Buch Hiob (Freiburg 1897) 26-27; A.S. PEAKE, Job.
Introduction, Revised Version with Notes and Index (New York 1905) 79; J.
STRAHAN, The Book of Job Interpreted (Edinburgh 1913) 61; C.J. BALL, The
Book of Job, a Revised Text and Version (Oxford 1922) 134-135.
3
S. TERRIEN, “Job”, 935-938; S.R. DRIVER – G.B. GRAY, A Critical and
Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Job (ICC; Edinburgh 1921) 43; D.J.A.
CLINES, Job 1–20 (WBC 17; Dallas, TX 1989) 126-127; C. NEWSOM, “Job”,
The New Interpreter’s Bible IV (1996) 317-637, here 377.
BIBLICA 95.3 (2014) 347-370